similar to: [Bug 3099] Please parallelize filesystem scan

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 Summary: Please parallelize filesystem scan Product: rsync Version: 2.6.4 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: hpa@zytor.com QAContact:

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 --- Comment #6 from Arie Skliarouk <skliarie at gmail.com> 2013-02-10 06:45:30 UTC --- Any hope for the bug to be resolved? It is really inconvenient to have production database to be down for double amount of time than what is really necessary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are

Sounds to me like maintaining the metadata cache is important - and tuning the filesystem to do so would be more beneficial than caching writes, especially with a backup target where a write already written will likely never be read again (and isnt a big deal if it is since so few files are changed compared to the total # of inodes to scan). Your report of the minutes for the re-sync shows the

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 wayned@samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 --- Comment #8 from Chip Schweiss <chip at innovates.com> --- I would argue that optionally all directory scanning should be made parallel. Modern file systems perform best when request queues are kept full. The current mode of rsync scanning directories does nothing to take advantage of this. I currently use scripts to split a couple

What sort of performance is expected over GigE, with Samba 3 as the server and XP64 as the client? I havn't been able to find any current benchmarks at all. http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2010-June/156708.html talks about the same configuration, and suggests that the protocol should be able to break 100MB/sec. (Unfortunately, the poster disappeared without following up.) Focusing on

Dear list, I would like to generate random numbers from a Voigt distribution, hopefully in a way as simple as getting random numbers from a normal distribution with 'rnorm'. Is there any package to do this? Speed is an issue in this application. Or, as the Voigt distribution is a convolution of a Gaussian and a Lorentzian, can I simply combine random numbers from rnorm and rcauchy in some

Dear expeRts, first of all I'd like to thank you for the quick help on my last which() problem. Here is another one I could not tackle: I have data on an absorption measurement which I want to fit with an voigt profile: fn.1 <- function(p){ for (i1 in ilong){ ff <- f[i1] ex[i1] <- exp(S*n*L*voigt(u,v,ff,p[1],p[2],p[3])[[1]]) } sum((t-ex)^2) } out <-

Hi, how may I define in a callfile the CallerID presentation to be used for the requested call, eg. set it to prohibited? TIA, Bruno -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Bruno.Voigt.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 270 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20050913/fcb5c595/Bruno.Voigt.vcf

Hi all, I'm looking for a way with any asterisk-version with TE410P (cpe EuroISDN, Q931) for sending an INFORMATION ELEMENT KeypadFacility, eg. *87, during a connected call to the PSTN switch. Are there existing functions in asterisk to generate & send such IE ? If not what existing modules would be best to derive from? TIA, Bruno -------------- next part -------------- A non-text

On 10/10/2016 5:33 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > I've got a pair of identical CentOS 6.7 servers, with SuperMicro > X8DTE-F motherboards, these have 2 each Intel 82574L ethernet ports. > The eth0 ports are plugged in with 10' runs of brand new cat 5e cable > to a Cisco Nexxus 9000 switch (provided by the data center). > > These servers keep coming up at 100baseT rather

Hi, On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 6:03 AM, John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> wrote: > I've got a pair of identical CentOS 6.7 servers, with SuperMicro X8DTE-F > motherboards, these have 2 each Intel 82574L ethernet ports. The eth0 > ports are plugged in with 10' runs of brand new cat 5e cable to a Cisco > Nexxus 9000 switch (provided by the data center). > >

Oooh Plate Echo was what people had before digital reverbs! (When they didn't have spring reverb!) - Long ago... They are quite rare now because only big studios had them as they took up a lot of room! (and then they threw them all away) *jealous* Do you really have a plate reverb or just a digital simulation? love Freya --- Robert Voigt <robert.voigt@gmx.de> wrote: > uh, you

I've got a pair of identical CentOS 6.7 servers, with SuperMicro X8DTE-F motherboards, these have 2 each Intel 82574L ethernet ports. The eth0 ports are plugged in with 10' runs of brand new cat 5e cable to a Cisco Nexxus 9000 switch (provided by the data center). These servers keep coming up at 100baseT rather than gigE. I've swapped ports and cables with a different server,

I installed a Centos 4.x system using a lvm install across four HDDs. It is my first install using LVM. System had a power-failure and stopped booting up. A new trainee simply took out the HDDs and restarted the file-server on a fresh HDDs. Now the problemis that the four HDDs have data. But the order of the HDDs (of install....1st primary, 2nd primary etc.) is unknown. Earlier we used to boot

I'm considering using rsync in our data center but I'm worried about whether it will scale to the numbers and sizes we deal with. We would be moving up to a terabyte in a typical sync, consisting of about a million files. Our data mover machines are RedHat Linux Advanced Server 2.1 and all the sources and destinations are NFS mounts. The data is stored on big NFS file servers. The

Hello, Recently while working with rsync as the way to mirror large (several GB) archive on a regular basis, I came across several problems, and also got the ideas about their possible solutions - please could you investigate & consider implementing the features, described below, to future RSYNC releases ? - when the checksumming (consider very large archive, several GB) stage of rsync

Dear all, I freshly installed a new smb-server that should act as file server with some smb-shares. The pdc is a Windows 2008 r2 server. My smb.conf is as follows: [global] workgroup = agroup server string = ssmbserver #passdb backend = tdbsam map to guest = Bad User usershare allow guests = No security = domain wins support = No

I have a samba server with 2 ethernet ports, one of which is a gigabit port. When connecting from a windows client that has a crossover to the gigabit port, and a crossover to the 100Meg port: If I connect via \\gige.ethernet.address\foo , and copying a large file, windows reports outbound traffic on the gige port and return traffic on the 100Meg port. Thus, it seems the samba server sees the

On 17/09/2020 13:35, Michael Schumacher wrote: > Hello Phil, > > Wednesday, September 16, 2020, 7:40:24 PM, you wrote: > > PP> You can achieve this with a hybrid RAID1 by mixing SSDs and HDDs, and > PP> marking the HDD members as --write-mostly, meaning most of the reads > PP> will come from the faster SSDs retaining much of the speed advantage, > PP> but you